Conducting Talk in Secondary Science Classrooms: Investigating Instructional Moves and Teachers’ Beliefs
Abstract
Whole‐class discussion is a common instructional approach used by secondary science teachers. When orchestrated well, such an approach can provide students with opportunities to engage in extensive science talk with the benefit of teacher guidance and feedback. Our study investigated teachers’ approaches to discussion during the piloting of an urban ecology curriculum designed to support student participation in science discourse as well as teachers’ beliefs about science talk. Participants included five secondary science teachers and their students (n = 116). Our analysis focused on transcripts of whole‐class discussions and interviews with teachers about their beliefs regarding talk. We found that the students’ contributions during discussions were typically limited to simple phrases or short sentence responses that did not voluntarily include reasoning. The teachers’ framing of the lessons and the moves the teachers made during the discussions seemed to reinforce the limited nature of the students’ responses. Furthermore, we found that teachers rarely used probing questions or tossed back students’ ideas. The beliefs teachers expressed about their students, themselves, and external factors provided insight into why teachers continued to take an authoritative stance even though they believed teacher‐driven discussion was not the ideal. © 2013Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 97:367–394, 2013
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
By tossing back questions, the teachers validate the students' ideas and establish them as a baseline on which to build, shift the responsibility for knowledge construction back to the student, and promote student-student collaboration.
“By doing this, the teachers not only validate the students' ideas and establish them as a baseline on which to build, but they shift the responsibility for knowledge construction back to the student and promote student-student collaboration”
From Young Children's Epistemic Operations and Emergent Argumentation in Inquiry‐Based Discussions: The Role of Teacher Questioning and Collaborative Interactions (2025) · cites this paper as Pimentel and McNeill 2013
Cites
Reasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children to use language to learn science
Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1080/01411920410001689689 · Cited by 637 · see citing works
Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay‐Chambers, J. (2008) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20248 · Cited by 423 · see citing works
Using Questioning to Guide Student Thinking
van Zee, E., & Minstrell, J. (1997) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0602_3 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes?
Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., Vrikki, M., & Wheatley, L. (2019) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730 · Cited by 425 · see citing works
Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk
Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., & Svaricek, R. (2016) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., Svaricek, R., Majcik, M., Navratilova, J., Drexlerova, A., Kychler, J., & Salamounova, Z. (2019) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101217 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Analyzing Teachers’ Use of Metadiscourse: The Missing Element in Classroom Discourse Analysis
Tang, K. (2017) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21275 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Hwang, Y.-S., Noh, J.-E., Medvedev, O. N., & Singh, N. N. (2019) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-019-01236-1 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Soncini, A., Matteucci, M. C., & Butera, F. (2021) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-020-00494-1 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Soysal, Y. (2022) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-021-00266-3 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Tao, Y., Wang, D., & Chen, G. (2026) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1002/berj.70031 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Caño, L., & Sanz, J. (2025) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.70010 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- PIMENTEL, D. S., & McNEILL, K. L.
- Affiliations
- Boston College (US)
- Corresponding author
- PIMENTEL, DIANE SILVA
- Venue
- Science Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-04-15
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 367-394
- ISSN
- 0036-8326 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-237X
- OpenAlex
- W1573414870
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7
- FWCI
- 33.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Science Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Keywords
- whole-class discussion, science talk, teacher beliefs, secondary science teaching, probing questions, teacher authority, student reasoning, classroom discourse
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review